- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:52:36 +0100
- To: Clint Hill <clint.hill@gmail.com>
- Cc: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, public-nextweb@w3.org
On Monday, April 29, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Clint Hill wrote: > Beyond potentially alienating folks due to W3C association and Invited > Expert process, was there more you could elaborate on? No. I just don't see any benefits (just more admin). The quality and health of a group should be judged on its outputs and communication, not if it's a CG or WG. I personally think we have been doing good work over the last 6 months as a CG, and we are just getting started. Admittedly, in terms of outputs, we have stalled in the last 4 months so we still need to find a way to address that as a group. If we find that we eventually want to produce specs (or IPR issues start getting in the way in some serious way), then we should absolutely push to become a WG. -- Marcos Caceres
Received on Monday, 29 April 2013 15:53:10 UTC